February 2, 2011
Yesterday DNA expert Scott Walton explained to the jury that
DNA evidence is either inconclusive, suitable for exclusion, or
identifiable. In order for it to be
identifiable, it has to have 13 of 16 markers.
After he presented his certifiable findings from the Arivaca crime
scene, Judge Leonardo asked the jury if they had any questions. All were deathly silent.
The evidence from the scene of the crime, controlled by the Pima County Sheriff’s Office (PCSO), was swabbed. Only the specimen bags with swabs were sent to the lab to test for DNA, not the physical evidence. Physical evidence included shell casings, weapons, boots, clothing, a van, blood from the ground, and jewelry, which were swabbed. Walton explained that testing does not determine whether body fluids are sweat, saliva, urine, blood or feces. Whether or not the body fluid is blood is only determined if the lab does a serology test. Unless Sheriff Dupnik's office specifically requests a serology test, no test will be done.
In the PSCO Media Release, there was a blood-spattered
t-shirt taken from an illegal alien on the property (now referred to as a
property caretaker). The serology at
the lab indicated it was the caretaker’s blood. There was no victim’s blood found on any of the desert camouflage
clothing or boots allegedly worn by the defendant. Blood of the victims (Brisenia, Raul, and Gina) was never found
on any of the swabs tested by serology.
According to testimony, a DNA specimen was not submitted from the state's primary witness, Oin Oakstar. He was the first suspect arrested for these murders, and is the only suspect in this case to take a plea.
In a suspicious 11th-hour move to implicate the
defendant, PCSO on January 10, right before the trial, submitted DNA evidence
in the form of a swab from a ring which they claimed belonged to the victim,
and which was allegedly found in Forde’s possession. The expert testified that there was a 1 in 2,000 chance that the
DNA on the ring could belong to a white woman. In order to have a positive identification, at least 13 of 16
markers must be present, and there were 3 in this sample. This
was spun by Kim Smith of the Arizona Daily Star as a proven fact that it’s
Shawna Forde’s DNA! No other white
women were swabbed for their DNA; only Shawna Forde, so in the biased media’s
faulty logic then it must be Forde’s!
Is there no other white woman to whom this DNA sample could belong?
FBI informant witness Ron Wedow, who was charged with a crime which was later dismissed, and who received payment from the FBI, claimed Shawna Forde drew him a map of a home in Arivaca which was funneling drugs, money, and weapons from Mexico. According to FBI agent Chris Anderson, the FBI office in Phoenix destroyed that map! How convenient. Wedow told the defense attorney that Forde denied having anything to do with the murders in Arivaca.
The more the left-wing media twists the evidence in this case, the more we will expose them.